In the EU more than 500 million people in 28 countries have the right to vote in the European elections. Arguably this is an historic and unparalleled exercise in democracy. But how democratic is the EU?

Join us for a lively debate with:Luzi Stamm, vice-president of the SVPMartin Naef, SPCharlotte Sieber-Gasser, University of BernBruno Waterfield, EU correspondent for The Times
Chaired by David Bowden, Institute of Ideas.RSVP'd Yes: 1
(1 members and No guests)

Tbh, what is the value of democracy when people democratically vote on issues they most of the time do not understand nor want to, nor are willing to educate themselves on consequences.

I'm not sure where this argument is taking us. Do leaders have a better understanding of the consequences of their actions? This would require that the people expressly select leaders who understand matters better than they themselves do. But how then, if they don't understand things so well, how do they recognize that others understand it better?

Delegation of power, if the delegates are high quality and ensure high standards...why not. If somebody calls it undemocratic, might be just manipulative political rhetorics. Quality, yes. Whatever it is called.

If some people are of better quality than others (whatever that means, the very thought makes me shudder) then how can people of lesser quality recognise that there are people of greater quality and accept them as leaders. In the days of the feudal system, you could claim you were of greater quality because your ancestor was Charlemagne or King Alfred or King David. It was of course manipulative political rhetorics to claim that some of their descendants were not great leaders, and worse still, undemocractic.

I think this would qualify for elitism, not democracy. Which may actually fit Europe, considering its longer history of it. Quite prominent thinking in communist politburos. But it certainly isn't a pro-Democracy sentiment. Perhaps in comparison to Eastern Europe, the EU is quite democratic indeed.

I'd still like to hear of how the EU has upheld democracy. Any examples?

And what does the USA have to do with it? Why not compare it North Korea instead?

A litmus test for a true democracy is whether the policies of the powers that be can be influenced by the sentiments of the population. At the moment, there is not much of a substantial mechanism for this kind of feedback loop in the EU.

The EU has been a useful social engineering experiment for preventing a third world war between Germany and France. But in the process of this singular objective, a beast was created with its own apetite, with its own will for self-interest and self-preservation. Yet nobody really knows who its master is, if it even has one. It does not appear to be the population of Europe.

I think you can find plenty of examples of how the EU debilitates democracy, if you actually listen to what is said. That is what that debate is about. But if you don't listen to admit points made, then of course it would baffle you.

And what does the USA have to do with it? Why not compare it North Korea instead?

A litmus test for a true democracy is whether the policies of the powers that be can be influenced by the sentiments of the population. At the moment, there is not much of a substantial mechanism for this kind of feedback loop in the EU.

The EU has been a useful social engineering experiment for preventing a third world war between Germany and France. But in the process of this singular objective, a beast was created with its own apetite, with its own will for self-interest and self-preservation. Yet nobody really knows who its master is, if it even has one. It does not appear to be the population of Europe.

You often offer arguments based on what your opponent's background appear to be. No matter what MC would have said, am pretty sure you'd still perceive her answer as coming from someone who has little understanding of true democracy. (see your reference to East Europe/"communist politburos")
I just mirrored your way of debating.

Oh come you guys, its not about debating Phos. You're suppose to bring own merits to your argument for the topic at hand. Unless you're conceding there is not much to respond, in which case, you sit and wait until one comes to you.